Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T15CM02512
Parcel: 127022690

Address:
5324 E 1ST ST 01

Review Status: Active

Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW

Permit Number - T15CM02512
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Active
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/16/2015 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
04/24/2015 ERIC NEWCOMB BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. SHEET CS-1.0; EGRESS AND EXIT WIDTH: THE EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE IS LISTED AS 200' PER THE IBC TABLE 1016.2. WITH THE APPROPRIATE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, THIS TABLE ALLOWS 300'. PLEASE REVISE.
2. SHEET A-0.0; PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT PLAN: THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS B AND H IS INDICATED AS 12'-7 ½" ON THE PLAN. PER THE IBC SECTION 705.3 AND TABLE 602 (AS SHOWN ON SHEET CS-1.0), THE VB CONSTRUCTION FOR THE EXTERIOR WALLS REQUIRES A MINIMUM FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE OF 20' BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS (10' FROM EACH BUILDING TO THE IMAGINARY LINE) IN ORDER TO HAVE NO REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE RATING. DOES THE WALL CONSTRUCTION LISTED IN THE WALL SCHEDULE (SHEET A-1.0) MEET THE ONE HOUR FIRE RESISTANCE RATING IN BUILDING B? PLEASE PROVIDE ON THE DRAWINGS A U.L. LISTING FOR THIS WALL SYSTEM, AND INCLUDE A DETAIL OF THE WALL SYSTEM. DOES THE WALL SYSTEM OF THE EXISTING BUILDING H MEET THE FIRE RESISTANCE REQUIREMENTS? PLEASE VERIFY. ANOTHER APPROACH TO THE SEPARATION ISSUE WOULD BE TO CONSIDER THE NEW BUILDING B AS PART OF THE EXISTING BUILDING H, CREATING A MIXED USE OCCUPANCY. VERIFY ON THE DRAWINGS PER THE IBC SECTION 508 FOR SEPARATED AND NON-SEPARATED USES AND IF THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR CONSIDERATION HERE.
3. GENERAL: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS THE PENETRATIONS OF THE FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 714.
4. GENERAL: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS THE ALLOWABLE AREA OF PROTECTED/UNPROTECTED OPENINGS OF THE FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 705.8.
5. GENERAL: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS THE COMBUSTIBLE PROJECTIONS OF THE FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 705.2.3.
6. GENERAL: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS THE PARAPET CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 705.11.1.
7. SHEET A-1.0 (DIMENSION PLAN); SHEET A-8.0 (DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULES): PLEASE PROVIDE ON THE DRAWINGS THE FIRE RESISTANCE RATED GLAZING AND DOORS OF THE FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 716.
8. SHEET A-2.0; FLOOR PLAN: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DIMENSION PLAN (SHEET A-1.0) THE NORTH AND SOUTH DOORS (05 AND 07) IN THE CORRIDOR 115 MEET THE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE OF THE ICC/ANSI FIGURE 404.2.3.5(a).
9. SHEET A2.0; FLOOR PLAN: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS THE HORIZONTAL SLIDING DOORS (01) MEET THE IBC REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 1008.1.4.3.
10. SHEET A-2.0; FLOOR PLAN: THE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE PER THE ICC/ANSI FIGURE 404.2.3.5(a) IS NOT MET AT THE DOOR INTO THE RECEPTION DESK (102). PLEASE REVISE.
11. SHEET A-3.0; KEYNOTES: NOTE 9 INDICATES A WALL MOUNTED WATER HEATER. PLEASE PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS AND A DETAIL ON THE DRAWINGS FOR THE WATER HEATER SUPPORT. INCLUDE FRAMING MEMBER SIZES, WALL FRAMING ANALYSIS, AND CONNECTION OF THE SUPPORT TO THE WALLS.
12. SHEET A-5.0; ROOF PLAN: PLEASE FINISH THE DETAIL REFERENCE AT THE HIP IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING.
13. SHEET A-5.0; KEYNOTES: NOTE 9 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. PLEASE VERIFY.
14. SHEET D-1.0; SECTION 5: IF THE EXTERIOR WALLS ARE REQUIRED TO BE FIRE RESISTANCE RATED, THE INTERIOR SHEATINGS MUST EXTEND TO THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOF SHEATHING (TYPICAL AT ALL EXTERIOR WALLS). PLEASE VERIFY.
15. SHEET D-3.0; ELEVATION 9; SECTION 11: PROVIDE THE CONNECTOR SIZE AT THE BASE OF THE ACCESS LADDER, AND HOW IT IS CONNECTED TO THE LADDER AND TO THE SLAB.
16. SHEET S101 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 51): THE ANCHOR BOLT SPACING FOR WALL 2 IN THE CALCULATIONS DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE SPACING SHOWN IN THE SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE (S062). PLEASE VERIFY.
17. SHEET S301 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 19): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE BEAM 4 REQUIRES A 5 1/8 X 18 GLUE LAM BEAM, WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES A 5 1/8 X 12 GLUE LAM BEAM. PLEASE CLARIFY.
18. SHEET S401; SECTION 101: THERE ARE SEVERAL NOTES THAT INDICATE THE WRONG PORTION ON THE SECTION. PLEASE VERIFY ALL NOTES.
19. SHEET S401; SECTION 106: THERE ARE SEVERAL NOTES THAT INDICATE THE WRONG PORTION ON THE SECTION. PLEASE VERIFY ALL NOTES.
20. SHEET S601; SECTION 309: PLEASE ADD NOTE 4 TO THE SECTION.
21. SHEET S602; SECTION 313: NOTE 1 SHOULD INDICATE A STUD WALL. PLEASE REVISE.
22. SHEET S602; SECTION 319: PLEASE ADD NOTE 1 TO THE SECTION.
23. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEET 5: IT APPEARS THE ROOF FRAMING KEY PLAN HAS B11 AND B12 REVERSED. PLEASE VERIFY.
24. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN REPSONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS.
04/28/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change PDSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: 5324 E. 1st Street
T15CM02512
Building Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 9, 2015

1. The building plans have been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed.

2. The building plans cannot be approved until a development package has been submitted and approved.

3. Until the above comments have been addressed and all other PDSD review agencies have approved the building plans zoning cannot approve.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956
04/29/2015 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Provide documentation showing the NFRC fenestration product ratings for the U-factor and the SHGC values on COMcheck or use the appropriate default U-factor and SHGC values from Tables C303.1.3 (1), C303.1.3 (2) and C303.1.3.(3), IECC 2012. Reference: Section C303.1.3, IECC 2012 (e.g. windows 1, 5, and 6; doors 1, 2, 3,and 4).
2. Provide heating and cooling load calculations that justify the capacities of the heating and cooling equipment specified for the project. Reference: Sections C403.2.1 and C403.2.2, IECC 2012, and Section 312.1, IMC 2012.
3. Considering that both fan coils are to have economizer systems and may be operating simultaneously, clarify how the outside air ducts and the gooseneck air intake were sized and how the return air is to be relieved from the building. Reference: Section C403.3.1.1.4, IECC 2012.
4. Verify that a switched luminaire is located adjacent to each gas-fired furnace located above the access ceiling for maintenance use. Reference: Section 306.3.1, IMC 2012.
5. Show the size, routing, and termination of the secondary condensate drains. Reference: Section 307.2.3, IMC 2012 as amended by the City of Tucson.
6. Secure the refrigerant circuit access ports of the condensing units or otherwise secure the condensing units to prevent unauthorized access. Reference: Section 1101.10, IMC 2012.
04/29/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The presence of manholes in a private sewer collection system will require review of the sewer design by the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality.
2. Revise the water distribution system calculations, correcting the arithmetic and using the manufacturer's recommended minimum water pressure for the specified water closets. Reference: Section 604.3, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
3. The developed length of the hot water supply piping appears to be greater than fifty feet; provide a method for maintaining the temperature of the hot water supply system. Reference: Section 607.2, IPC 2012.
4. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2520.98') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2521.70'). Provide backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
5. Provide a cleanout at the base of each vertical rainwater conductor prior to its connection to the horizontal storm sewer piping. Reference: Sections 708.3.4 and 101.8, IPC 2012.
6. Coordinate the roof drainage design with the architect; the roof areas and roof drain sizes shown on sheet A-5.0 do not agree with those shown on sheet P-1.1. Verify that the roof drain calculations include the effect of any vertical walls that can divert rainfall onto the roof. Reference: Section 1106.4, IPC 2012.
7. The depiction of the overflow roof drain in Detail 13/D-2.0 is incorrect. Verify that the roof drains used for the secondary (overflow) roof drainage system conform to ASME A112.6.4 0r ASME A112.3.1. Reference: Section 1102.6, IPC 2012.
8. The size of the horizontal storm drainage piping for the patio roof is not included in Table 1106.3; revise the size of the pipe. Reference: Section 1106.3, IPC 2012.
9. Coordinate the specifications of the water heater with the architect; the architect calls for a gas-fired water heater on sheet A-3.0 (keynote 9).
10. The gas piping is an extension of an existing gas distribution system from an adjacent building. Provide a complete diagram of the natural gas distribution system showing the all of the loads, developed lengths, and the layout of the distribution piping. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012 and Sections 401.3 and 402.2, IFGC 2012.
04/29/2015 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Reqs Change The water calculations on sheet P-2.1 indicate a total water demand of 160 GPM. Verify the total water demand served by the existing 2" water meter. Tucson Water limits a 2" meter to a maximum demand of 120 GPM.
04/30/2015 DAN SANTA CRUZ ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied While the electrical review for the current submittal is approved, due to the potential modifications necessary to address comments associated with the reviews of other disciplines the electrical workflow is denoted as denied in order to verify that those modifications will not adversely impact the electrical review.
05/07/2015 CPIERCE1 COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING Completed
05/11/2015 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
04/14/2015 ANY REJECT SHELF RECEIVED